SNG statistics
 

150 SNG's mostly $33's and $55's and my ITM is 46%, ROI 19%... How good or bad are those numbers for these levels? Is 150 really enough to give me an idea of where I stand ? Thanks in advance.

Re: SNG statistics
 

Run, Run Far and Quickly.





















Your sample size is way too small. Find the FAQ.

Re: SNG statistics
 

You will be flamed. let me repeat: You WILL be flamed.



Check the FAQ. It is pretty irrelevant whether those numbers are good or bad since your sample size is insubstantial. However, yes over a substantial sample size those would be good stats. Expect them to go down.

Re: SNG statistics
 

Your true ROI is with 95% accuracy between 13% and 25%, so you can be pretty certain you're a winning player.

Re: SNG statistics
 

Jeez - two posts saying this guy's going to be flamed, but no flaming. I'll start. Eff you! or, just read the faq before cit locks the thread [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Jeez - two posts saying this guy's going to be flamed, but no flaming. I'll start. Eff you! or, just read the faq before cit locks the thread [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I tried to say it nicely.

Re: SNG statistics
 

95% accuracy after 150 SNG's? Are you on crack?

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
95% accuracy after 150 SNG's? Are you on crack?

[/ QUOTE ]

I hope it's just sarcasm.

Re: SNG statistics
 

Very nice numbers, quit your job and go pro!



Really just wanted to get in before this gets locked!

Re: SNG statistics
 

play another 850 and come back!

Re: SNG statistics
 

Maybe I've misunderstood something, but I used a 95% confidence interval to calculate that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval

<p - z sqrt(p(1-p)/n), p + z sqrt(p(1-p)/n)> = <.19 - 1.96 sqrt(.19(1-.19)/150), .19 + 1.96 sqrt(.19(1-.19)/150)> = <.13, .25>

Don't you think he's got any idea wether he's a winning player when he's played 150 SnGs with a ROI of 19%?

Re: SNG statistics
 

Well I have no idea what that crazy math means, but I can say that I'm a winning player and I can easily go over 150 sngs with a negative roi or a ridiculously inflated one.

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
150 SNG's mostly $33's and $55's and my ITM is 46%, ROI 19%... How good or bad are those numbers for these levels? Is 150 really enough to give me an idea of where I stand ? Thanks in advance.

[/ QUOTE ]

19% ROI is terrible for $55s. I would quit now and get a job at McDonald's if possible.

Re: SNG statistics
 

Lock this beautiful thread.

Re: SNG statistics
 

If you are ITM 46% and your ROI is only 19% something is seriously wrong with your 3 and 4 handed play.

Re: SNG statistics
 

Jesus Christ, people. Stop commenting on a 150 sng sample.

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
If you are ITM 46% and your ROI is only 19% something is seriously wrong with your 3 and 4 handed play.

[/ QUOTE ]

My ROI is -3% and ITM 49% over my last 750 $55s. Should I be concerned?

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Jesus Christ, people. Stop commenting on a 150 sng sample.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just for future reference, at what sample is it OK to comment?

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well I have no idea what that crazy math means, but I can say that I'm a winning player and I can easily go over 150 sngs with a negative roi or a ridiculously inflated one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but if you split up all your SnGs in 150-SnGs-chunks, 95% of the chuncks' ROI should be between 13% and 25% if your true ROI is 19%. If you've played thousands of SnGs, of course many of the chuncks will have a ROI that is below or above that confidence interval.

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Jesus Christ, people. Stop commenting on a 150 sng sample.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's worse than that, because he doesn't have a sample size of 150. The OP said that he was playing mostly 33s and 55s. So what he has here is maybe 3 to 5 much smaller samples of different games, all lumped together and treated as if they were all the same thing.

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Jesus Christ, people. Stop commenting on a 150 sng sample.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's worse than that, because he doesn't have a sample size of 150. The OP said that he was playing mostly 33s and 55s. So what he has here is maybe 3 to 5 much smaller samples of different games, all lumped together and treated as if they were all the same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for this analysis.

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I've misunderstood something, but I used a 95% confidence interval to calculate that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval

<p - z sqrt(p(1-p)/n), p + z sqrt(p(1-p)/n)> = <.19 - 1.96 sqrt(.19(1-.19)/150), .19 + 1.96 sqrt(.19(1-.19)/150)> = <.13, .25>

Don't you think he's got any idea wether he's a winning player when he's played 150 SnGs with a ROI of 19%?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, when I started playing SNG's I had a 95% confidence of having an ROI greater than 20% after 100 games.

100 (i.e. after 200) games later my ROI was -5%. The confidence interval does not capture the variability of SNG play. either that or I beat the odds and went on a huge losing streak. Probably a bit of both.

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
play another 2850 and come back!

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

Re: SNG statistics
 

Is it good if my itm is 100% and roi is 300% over 3 games?

Re: SNG statistics
 

I won my first SNG moving up at 77's last night.

Gave my two weeks notice this morning.

F-U sample size.

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well I have no idea what that crazy math means, but I can say that I'm a winning player and I can easily go over 150 sngs with a negative roi or a ridiculously inflated one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but if you split up all your SnGs in 150-SnGs-chunks, 95% of the chuncks' ROI should be between 13% and 25% if your true ROI is 19%. If you've played thousands of SnGs, of course many of the chuncks will have a ROI that is below or above that confidence interval.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nonsense. This is true if you are measuring a physical process such as counting coin flips or weighing widgets. These things have independent observations. The same is not true when attempting to quantify human behaviour.

The result of a SnG is not independent of those immediately preceeding it. I hereby posit the STTF First Law of SnG Dynamics: the law of inertia. A player on a heater tends to remain on a heater, and a player on a downswing tends to go on tilt. In other words, long runs of winning or losing tend to be self-reenforcing, and will be greater in magnitude and duration than runs of heads versus tails in a coin flipping games.

A sample size of 150 will certainly give you a statistically significant result to decide if a coin is unbiased. Even if the OP had a sample size of 150 (and he doesn't), empirical evidence here indicates that would not be large enough to average out the psychological effect and the resultant long swings up and down.

Experienced students of the game here have concluded that a sample size of 1000 will average out the mind swings in the game and give a good estimate of true skills. This is a subjective analysis that you will not find in any stat text, but one that stands the test of STTF time.

Re: SNG statistics
 

Okay, thanks for the clearification. The tilt thing is obvious, as we play worse when we lose a lot. But I don't understand the causes of the heater, do we actually play better when we win a lot?

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
But I don't understand the causes of the heater, do we actually play better when we win a lot?

[/ QUOTE ]

Pros talk about playing their "A" game, and recognize that they don't always do so. If you just won a few SnGs, you are more likely to be playing your "A" game because you have confidence in your skills and your decisions. You don't fold a good hand because you are afraid of yet another bad beat, and you don't bet a bad hand because the cards have been running crappy and you are "over due". You are thinking more clearly because you aren't feeling sorry for yourself or worrying about your shrinking bankroll.

Re: SNG statistics
 

LOCK THREAD, NOW.....AHHHHHHH!

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
I hereby posit the STTF First Law of SnG Dynamics: the law of inertia. A player on a heater tends to remain on a heater, and a player on a downswing tends to go on tilt. In other words, long runs of winning or losing tend to be self-reenforcing, and will be greater in magnitude and duration than runs of heads versus tails in a coin flipping games.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this for downswings. The problem with heater is the feeling of invincibility. Ever go on a heater and think "I can call all-in on the bubble with 66 and deep stacks because I know my opponent is pushing crap and I've been winning every coin flip anyway?" I know I play my best on a totally even keel: no tilting, no rushing. It keeps my mind as free from distractions external to the probabilistic considerations of the game as possible. I suspect most people are similar. Also, no heater persists without an occasional reinforcement of bad behavior, a feature that separates poker from games of more pure skill. Any time a bad behavior, a -EV call that works out in the short term, is reinforced, a player's game devolves slightly.

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
...murmur, murmer....150 games......murmur, murmur....

[/ QUOTE ]

BURN HIM!!! BURN HIM TO HELL, OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!

http://www.xeni.net/images/bm2003/fl...r-crucifix.jpg

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I've misunderstood something, but I used a 95% confidence interval to calculate that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval

<p - z sqrt(p(1-p)/n), p + z sqrt(p(1-p)/n)> = <.19 - 1.96 sqrt(.19(1-.19)/150), .19 + 1.96 sqrt(.19(1-.19)/150)> = <.13, .25>

Don't you think he's got any idea wether he's a winning player when he's played 150 SnGs with a ROI of 19%?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not an appropriate CI calculation for ROI. It would be ok for ITM though. Do you see why?

Indy

Re: SNG statistics
 

Maybe beacause ITM is only true or false, while ROI is an average of each game's ROI? I dunno, why is it? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well I have no idea what that crazy math means, but I can say that I'm a winning player and I can easily go over 150 sngs with a negative roi or a ridiculously inflated one.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not as important as knowing whether or not a losing player can go 150 SNGs with a 19% ROI.

If the OP had a negative ROI and was wondering if he was truly a losing player after 150 SNGs, then it would be relavent to say that a winning player has done the same.

So...any losers among us? Anyone? Bueller?

...

zip

Re: SNG statistics
 

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe beacause ITM is only true or false, while ROI is an average of each game's ROI? I dunno, why is it? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

By George u've got it. ROI is not a proportion so you cannot use this CI. Another poster has touched on the nature of correlated data, but ignoring that you could use something like a normal or exact CI.

Indy

Re: SNG statistics
 

I AM LOCKING THIS THREAD NOW BUT YOU SHOULD KNOW FOR FUTURE REFERENCE THAT I HATE YOU.

CITANUL